After a sluggish few rounds Novak Djokovic stepped up his game Thursday blitzing Nicolas Almagro 6-3, 6-4 to advance to the semifinals of the Indian Wells Tennis Masters Series.

“It’s definitely satisfying to play well,” said Djokovic. “This is something that we all want to do, and we all practise very hard each day in order to play as best as we can in the official matches. At this stage of the tournament it was important for me to stay mentally focused from the first to the last point.”

Djokovic has now won 10 straight matches on the tournament’s slow courts which the Serb says is suited to his game. With two titles who’s the argue? Novak will have a day off before his semifinal Saturday against surging John Isner who slipped past Gilles Simon 6-3, 1-6, 7-5.

In the bottom half, Roger Federer and Rafael Nadal are just one match from a blockbuster semifinal collision.

For the fourth time in as many events Federer has played, he’ll again meet Juan Martin Del Potro. Federer has owned Del Potro winning 10 of 12 including four straight, 3-0 this year. Even worse, Federer’s won nine consecutive sets against the big South American.

Del Potro did get tantalizingly close to that second set in Dubai (he led 6-2) a few weekends ago, but on a slower hardcourt a Federer should prevail – both DelPo’s wins came on faster courts at the US Open and London Indoors. Del Potro does have the power and ability to beat Federer, but between the ears I think there’s a significant blockage.

“I know him really well now,” Federer said. “He’s really coming back very strong, and he’s gonna be clearly, my opinion, in the top 10 at the end of the year, if not a whole lot higher. Now, I don’t know how much is gonna help him or me the slow conditions here at Indian Wells if we were to play against each other, because Dubai was extremely quick. It’s gonna be something you know, gonna present a different challenge to me. But I remember him playing well here in the past, and it’s gonna be a tough matchup, you know.”

Added Del Potro, “I think I felt closer in Dubai when I play against him. I had many chance to win the second set, and the third everything can happen. But when you miss easy balls or you don’t take the opportunities against the top players, you will lose.”

In addition to just playing Del Potro, another concern for Federer has been his health. Like many other players Federer’s also been stricken by the flu bug that’s hit the tournament. The Swiss does say he’s getting better, but it sounds like an issue.

“I’m feeling a whole lot better, and I hope with the day off I will be at 100%,” Federer said Wednesday. “But it’s been a difficult week. I’ve hardly practiced. I’ve only played matches. I think today in a baseline match it kind of showed a bit.

It’s taken some time to for me to get better, to be honest. I thought I would see quicker improvements, but still hurting a bit.
But at least I don’t have sort of massive headache and aches and pains anymore. That’s all gone now.”

Aches and pains? Massive headaches? It’s amazing he’s made it this far! That said, this match will be played under the sun, so any lingering illness Federer’s suffering will only be magnified.

In the second quarter, Nadal will be the heavy favorite against the resurgent David Nalbandian. The Argentine advanced to the quarterfinals when Tsonga all but choked trying to serve out the match in the second set against David on Wednesday.

Nalbandian does have the game and talent to beat Nadal, as evidenced by his two wins over Rafa, but at age 30 and well off his peak form it’s tough to see any chance for an upset here. Nadal, who interestingly got the first of his three wins over Nalbandian at Indian Wells saving five matchpoints in 2009, has looked like his dominant self all week. Through three matches he hasn’t lost a set nor his serve.

But the Spaniard remains weary of the Nalbandian threat.

“Always Nalbandian is a very tough player to play against with unbelievable talent,” Nadal said. “And he will have a day off tomorrow, so that give him a lot, my opinion. He’s this kind of player that when he’s playing well he’s the best players of the world. So gonna be a really, really difficult match for me, and I have to be ready for everything.”

Knowing this could be one of Nalbandian’s last real chances at a major win, might he bit “up” for this one?

In the women’s semifinals, pin-up pretties Ana Ivanovic and Maria Sharapova meet in one semifinal, Victoria Azarenka and Angelique Kerber in the other. Azarenka, winner of all 21 matches this year, is the clear favorite to win not just against the German but the event. and I think she will. Ivanovic has played well and I think she’ll be on top of Sharapova (???), but can she finish her off? I’m not so sure, it will be interesting.

“She’s definitely still has, same style, really aggressive, and sort of she goes for that first hit, and obviously big serve,” said Ivanovic who last played Sharapova in a 2008 Australian Open final loss. “That, I think, improved in her game, as well. It’s gonna be tough match. Obviously it’s very hard to say when you don’t actually feel the ball and we haven’t played in a long time so that’s something I’m gonna make adjustments once I’m on the court. I definitely want to focus on what I’m doing out there, and it’s very important probably also to expose her movement.”

ESPN2 has live coverage over Del Potro-Federer at 4pm ET. Tennis Channel will air the Nalbandian-Nadal quarterfinal at 6pm ET and the first women’s semifinal after.

If the Roger-Nadal does come through as it is more likely, the edge in that contest will be in favour of Nadal especially the more positive H2H he has against Roger. It is also against Roger that Nadal delivers his best and that has shaken Federer many times before. I have seen many matches between these two where Nadal just doesn’t miss shots even tough ones whereas against many other players it is not the case. May be the sight of Roger propels Nadal to give his best and he executes that to perfection. Coming to the current contest, the edge will be in favour of Nadal, but if Roger plays his best then anything can happen. I would say 60:40 in favour of Nadal especially considering that it is a slow court.

Nadal will be hoping Fed beats Delpo – because frankly, now, with so many hard court matches in recent months, Delpo is a real danger to Nadal on hard courts, even if they are slow like in IW. He could really blow Nadal off the court.

Nadal has always been prety beatable even during his peak years. His best year was 2010, when he went 72-10, still lost 10 matches. Compare that to 74-6, 81-4, then 92-5, for federer in 2004, 05, 06. Or Djokovic went 70-6 last year, with a couple of losses just due to injury.

Almost all of Nadal’s losses are outside of clay anyway, with at least a third of victories on clay. So if you look at his match record outside of clay, he is pretty beatable.

The reason he NOW beats Fed often on outdoor hard courts – again, Fed is 30, guys, 5 years older, and has a one-handed backhand, which nobody else will every have going forward. Its too much of a liability, and no slam champion in the future, after Fed, will have a one-handed backhand.

Though both DelPo’s wins came on faster courts at the US Open and London Indoors, there were mitigating factors in both losses.
- At 2009 World Tour Finals, Federer’s three set loss to delpo was not critical. Roger had entered the WTF without beating a top 50 players since the US Open (he had taken a break to rest his bad back and lost Basel to Djokovic and then Paris first round to No. 49 Julien Benneteau). At WTF, Federer qualified for the semifinals by beating Verdasco and Murray in three setters. Federer had qualified for the semifinals, and Roger was top in his round robin group even with the loss to Delpo. So possibly Federer was conserving energy in the third set.
- At 2009 US Open final, while leading 2 sets to 1, Federer led the fourth set 5-4, 15-30 on del Potro’s serve. Roger was just two points from the title. Delpo’s first serve winner at 15-30 was makeable for Federer on his backhand returns of such first serves. As well, Federer — the king of tiebreaks in tennis history — would have wanted back the fourth set tie-break that was controversial for fans calling line calls. Reputed tennis correspondent Tom Tebbutt analyzed: “It appears more and more obvious that Roger Federer’s troublesome back was at least a partial explanation for his late-match fade in the U.S. Open final against Juan Martin del Potro.”http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/match-tough/federers-back-needs-a-break/article1301682/

Federer beat delpo easily on the slow Australian Open courts. But, after four consecutive losses to Federer and Roger not being 100%, Delpo has nothing to lose and should just close his eyes, pray and hit… and hope he catches Roger in a funk.

Federer said he probably caught the flu bug while travelling from Europe to Indian Wells — not at Indian Wells. Probably caught the flu at the New York exhibition, as there was a flu epidemic in New York at the time, I think. federer’s comments on his flu and Delpo are in his interview here:http://www.asapsports.com/show_interview.php?id=78456

Delpo has a good chance to beat Nadal, if they meet. Already on grass — Delpo’s worst surface — Juan Martin gave Nadal all he could hand le last Wimbledon (Rafa even called for a medical time out at 6-6 first set yet ran like rabbit before and after, lol)

Federer today is at a different level than where he was in last year’s Dubai-IW-Miami stretch. After a third consecutive loss to Djokovic within six weeks at IW last year (people were still coming to grips with the suddenly improved Djokovic), Federer seemed lose motivation at Miami. Federer’s match against Nadal was so uncharacteristically bad that some felt the crafty Federer tanked the match to throw Nadal at Djokovic. And what a strategy it turned out to be — Nadal’s seven consecutive losses to Djokovic has put a big dent on his supporters’s claims of GOAThood.

Federer has the confidence from knowing he has the best hardcourt winning record in ATP history (probably entire tennis history)in terms of career win-loss percentage (83.2%), total titles (50) and hardcourt grand slams (9). As well, Federer knows he has the third best winning outdoor record in ATP history (81.7% is co-third with Jimmy Connors and ahead of Lendl, Laver, McEnroe, Djokovic, Agassi, Sampras, Edberg, Becker, etc). A great champion like Federer goes into his matches with these positive thoughts in his mind, and does not expect to lose.http://www.atpworldtour.com/Reliability-Zone/Reliability-Hard-Career-List.aspx

Federer’s fitness will be a major factor in his semifinal athletic match with Nadal, assuming both meet (Nalbandian and Delpo are both capable of pulling off upsets). In Roger’s mind he knows he has already Nadal outdoors, otherwise he would have never beaten Nadal in Spain on outdoor clay in 2009. Surely he wanted back their last match in Australia, after such a great start and despite Nadal playing better tennis than he did against Djokovic.

Since after the 2009 Australian Open Final,

- Federer and Nadal have met in four finals. Federer won two finals (2010 World Tour Finals, 2009 Madrid) and Nadal won two finals (2010 Madrid, 2011 French Open).

- Federer 2011 WTF beatdown of Nadal is the most lop-sided career win between the Big 4 players in terms of percentage of total points won and second fastest win in terms of matchtime (Fed’s 2006 WTF over Nadal was 2 minutes faster). And Roger did it at age 30 despite the bad H2H record.http://www.menstennisforums.com/showthread.php?t=193260

- Federer past his prime has only a 3-5 losing record to Nadal in his absolute prime. Three of Nadal’s wins came on clay, as usual.

- Federer won three slams (2 points away from winning fourth slam at 2009 US Open) and two world tour finals. Nadal won four slams.

I think the Australian open match is a better example of how the match will be with fed coming short at the big points, rather then the miami match were nadal didn;t really have to do a bloody thing execept give fed an opportunity to hit the ball in the net or out.

The brilliant Nalbandian laid two big beatings on Nadal in 2007, including a 6-0 bagel set in Paris and a whipping in Spain. Nalbandian’s last three losses to Nadal included four tight 6-7 or 5-7 sets even though Nalbandian wasn’t at his best or fittest. With a day to rest, let’s see what problems Nalbandian can pose for Nadal. It’s a big match that might just motivate Nalbandian to bring something special, though it’s a lot to ask. But Nalbandian has a better record against left handers than right handers.http://www.atpworldtour.com/Players/Head-To-Head.aspx?pId=N301&oId=N409

sienna lets be fair rafas not a good player,hes a great player,and has 10 grand slams to novaks 5,rafa has 46 titles overall,a career grand slam,a singles gold medal,and ATM holds the record for the most masters titles,novak has half as many titles overall,its not just about what you do for one year,rafas been either the best or second best player for years,novaks done for one year,what rafa and especially roger have done for years.

brando yeah exactly,and novak has to get through isner on the other side,too much gets taken for granted sometimes,not necasarilly a given that whomever wins this touney will also go on to dominate the year either,its only march the seasons still young yet,BTW dont get to see much doubles,but judging by everyones comments,its nice to here of Rafa and Mark doing so well up to now.

As a Federer and DjokerNole fan (and one who understands Federer has a mental block again Rafa pretty much the same way Nadal has against Djokovic), I hope Del Potro wins against Federer so he can defeat Nadal and then Del Potro vs Djokovic should be interesting match too. Nadal-Federer means Nadal winning and ONCE again the new slow match playing rivalry Nadal vs Djokovic.

sienna err he did, what was the 2010 uso final?rafa having a h2h record over roger, has never taken away rogers greatness,neither should the loosing streak that rafa has against djokovic,as everyone on this forum says time and again,its the overall field that your sucess is measured upon,and the yardstick is in gs titles and other titles overall, and correct me if im wrong but there is only 5 players in history that have won more slams than rafa,as for been a clay court player granted his best surface is clay,and his least sucessfull surface is hardcourts,but the last time i looked he had won wimbledon twice,and also been in three other finals,and djokovic has yet to make a final at rg,against a player thats won it six times,and nothing against fed,but simply put rafa won those finals because he was the better player end of.

@TV: lmao, I actually like chocolate bars too! But I’m sure you ge rhe point I’m making- one of or both fed- rafa can get knocked out ofthe tourny today. Fed seems vulnerable, delpo is capable. Rafa hasn’t been tested yet, whilst nalby can pull of ljubicic and cause an upset.

I just stated that in order to become a GREAT player he needs to do those things. The 2010 year just makes him a good player. All thong are relevant of course. I;m talking in terms of tennis history etc

Anyone with 10 grand slams, a career slam, a lopsided winning record over Fed, a few Davis Cup titles, and an Olympic gold medal, and the record for most Masters titles won is a GREAT player! It doesn’t matter what his name is – that list of accomplishments speaks for itself.

Fed has an amazing list too of course, but that doesn’t nullify the fact that Nadal is a great player.

first of all, i do not believe in this GOAT theory because there is no way you can single out one player as the greatest in the history of tennis; there are just too many variables to consider, but i do believe there is a “greatest player in each era.”

anyway, it never ceases to amaze me that when you guys engage in this GOAT discussion, many of you like to include only the things that help solidify roger’s status as GOAT while eliminating things that are unfavorable. i hate to burst your bubble but it doesn’t work that way. when determining who’s greater, everything that relates to the comparison must be considered.

so for those who say the h2h doesn’t matter when comparing roger vs rafa accomplishments, provide a logical reason why not. the h2h is part of their tennis history! they had to play matches in order to establish that statistic; so where do get the idea that the stat is meaningless. also, tennis is played on three different surfaces, like or not, clay is one them, so someone explain to me why results on clay do not matter.

if that’s the case, then maybe we shouldn’t count the losses rafa has suffered on indoor courts, particularly at the YEC, because that’s not his favorite surface. maybe we shouldn’t include roger’s 5 or 6 yec titles because rafa hasn’t been able to beat him on that surface nor has he won the year end championships yet. so those losses don’t matter! let’s just throw out roger’s perfect 4:0 record against rafa on that surface. in other words, i don’t think that h2h is significant because that’s roger’s favorite surface. now you see how absurb that sounds!
you get my point!

i don’t know what these two players will achieved over the rest of their careers, but in the meantime, whether you like it or not, when all is said and done and historians compare the two careers, statistics on every surface will be matter.

nadalista, what are you, a Tennistalk site moderator who is stalking Sienna? Typically sites do not announce who is banned (so no one has a clue who is banned unles they work for the site) and many posters just leave sites whenever they get bored. Instead of attacking Sienna, why don’t you try to refute her comment if you actually have a good argument?

It;s not that just H2H never matters, but its all you Rafa fanatics continue to bring up, like that is all you want to hang your hat on. That is the BIG thing? LOL…..

Ands what about his other great achievements? How many GS on Clay? Now that is a great achievement, no one in this era comes close. But Rog has the total package against the “Field” of players. And in the end, Fed got 16 Slams with Rafa around, Rafa got 10 with Fed around. Now, its clear. When Rafa;s career is over, then you can take another look see.

nadalista: we’re still waiting for you to stop attacking posters and to post something with a good argument. Otherwise, “get a life” would apply best to you :)

In modern tennis history, only Federer, Laver, Lendl, Borg, Connors and Djokovic have had truly great seasons where they dominated their fields in such a one-sided way, despite all their top rivals playing well (Federer, Laver, Lendl, Borg did it for multiple seasons). Nadal had a great year in 2010 just like Wilander had a great year in 1988. But in 2010, let’s not forget that Federer and Djokovic were in a slump while Del Potro and Davydenko (Nadal’s nemeses outside clay) were recovering from injuries. And still Nadal lost 10 matches and won only 7 titles. Had Djokovic not had that titanic USO semifinal with Federer, could history have been different in the final?

Martina Navratilova on what it takes to be considered the greatest player: “It’s a combination of how many grand slams have you won, how many tournaments have you won, how many years you were number one”. At the 2009 Australian Open, Federer was asked: “Which is the most prestigious record in men’s tennis? Is it the most Grand Slams?” Federer: “Yeah, I mean, I guess this one is — yeah, to me it almost seems like, you know. Or weeks at No. 1 maybe, because that shows how long you’ve been at the top. More than slams, I guess. But then there’s many other ones as well. I feel those two are the most important at the moment.”

There are five basic ways of assessing greatness of a tennis player: the number of titles you won; which titles you won (e.g., grand slams, world tour finals, balance of titles on all surfaces, indoor/outdoor etc.); how long you were No. 1; other career/season records or streaks you achieved; and your talent in the way you hit the tennis ball. These are all measurable either objectively (see link) or subjectively (e.g.,”Rod Laver’s 10 best past and present players” in Herald Sun newspaper as well as Jack Kramer’s “I have never seen anyone play the game better than Federer” in the Observer/Guardian newspapers).

Perhaps Ken Rosewall — one of the greatest players who would probably have the record for most grand slams had tennis been open in the 1950s and 1960s — has the best answer: “It’s terribly difficult to come up with a specific answer because the strategies and the techniques of the game, and the rules and regulations, have changed so much in the last 20 or 30 years, especially with equipment. But look, I think you can’t deny the ability of the players today and obviously you would put Roger at the top of those players. I believe the players of days-gone-by would find it very, very difficult to compete against the players of today even with this new equipment. But, on the other hand, if you gave Roger Federer the old wooden racquets we used, I think he would still be very, very good. I would say the level of his play at the moment is at the highest standard you could hope to get.”

Tournament Highlights:
• The World No. 3 has a 36-8 career record here and he won three straight titles in 2004 (d. Henman), ’05 (d. Hewitt) and ’06 (d. Blake)…Since then, has reached the semi-finals in three of the past four years (2008-09, ’11)

• Opened on Sunday night with a 64 61 win over American teenage wild card Denis Kudla and followed on Tuesday night with a 67(4) 62 64 victory over No. 27 seed and top Canadian Milos Raonic, then came back to beat top Brazilian Thomaz Bellucci 36 63 64 on Wednesday

• Has held serve 34 of 37 service games (92%) and has hit 26 aces while winning 84% of first serve pts.

2012 in Review:
• The 30-year-old Swiss native comes into the quarter-finals with an outstanding 19-2 match record on the season, having won his last 12 matches since a Davis Cup four-set loss to John Isner on Feb 10

• Won back-to-back ATP World Tour titles in Rotterdam (d. del Potro) on Feb. 19 and Dubai (d. Murray) on Mar. 3…During streak, has only dropped three sets, to Nikolay Davydenko in semi-finals of Rotterdam and to Milos Raonic here on Tuesday and Thomaz Bellucci on Wednesday

• In Dubai, held serve 52 of 53 games, losing serve only time in final vs. Murray…Also led tournament with 39 aces…It was his fifth career Dubai crown and 72nd career title, which is No. 4 in Open Era

• Has won at least one ATP World Tour title for 12 straight years, best among active players (Roddick has 11)…Has won 36 of last 38 matches (losses since US Open: Nadal in Australian Open SFs, Isner in Davis Cup), capturing five titles in seven tournaments

The h2h always gets brought up by the same old, same old you know whos, how about concentrating (for a big change on how many finals nadal has lost since September? How many titles he has won since September? Yeah, I forgot. All the bad news only applies to Federer. Mem, you really need to get a life.

if one believes that federer is greater than nadal, then it’s one thing and even I’d call it perfectly justified, but how can one not call nadal a great player is beyond me. And give up the rafa’s a clay courter excuse already, he’s either dominated or still holds great and comfortable winning records over all the supposed grass/hard court specialists even on their favoured courts! and he’s invincible on clay, almost. It’s actually way too late now for anybody to try to take anything away from nadal!

and btw, nadal doesn’t have to win a single more slam, and yet he can be always remeberered and respected as one of the greatests, for the way he proved his doubters wrong, for the way he could turn the table on fed in even non-clay slams, for the way he adapted to the conditions, and for the way he continuously tried to improve himself and could overcome some of his weakness!
rafa’ll always be remembered for answering his detractors: who used to scoff at the idea of him winning a wimbledon one day, who laughed at the idea of him beating federer enroute his first wimbledon, who stil brought up excuses that AO is faster than wimby and therefore fed should beat him there! Rafa gave fitting reply to those also who were in self-denial by thinking that nadal cannot even further improve his overall game to win in the fastest and lowest bouncing of all-US Open courts! He crushed the hopes of those(one of whom was me too) who did not want him to win a olympic gold/USO in his life!

nadal’ll also be always remembered for looking upto his greatest rival(read federer) in order to observe him and then try things so that he could improve stuff in his own game to first match and then out-match and even eclipse his greatest rival roger federer…

nadal’ll be also remembered coz of how he handled the antagonistic FO crowd and force on them the wisdom that they shouldn’t hate one of their greatest champs!

and the list goes on!

these are the reasons why nadal’ll always be remembered and revered as one of the all-time greats…

and it’s not nadal’s fault if he has evolved as a player better adapted to the evolution in tennis in terms of surface speed/bounce. in a way, it makes nadal look pretty impressive and one could understand without much of heartache/envy why he’s such a great record over federer(whose game imo is less evolved to fit into the current scene).

I agree with you- i think most will remember rafa as the guy who proved his detractors wrong.

The guy who was doubted the most, yet overcame the odds on more ocassions than most. I think that’s why alot of sportsmen from other sports like rafa: he’s the champion who doesn’t let the naysayers, tough defeats, competition knock his will to keep coming back for more until he overcomes whatever challenge has been put in front of him!

Ajet, for as much as you love Fed, it is nice to see how much you respect Rafa, too, as your 3:10 post shows. I agree with all those things. Fed is still ahead in slams and length of records, like slam finals, semis, quarters and weeks at number 1, which sets him apart in some ways, but it doesn’t mean Nadal isn’t great as well for all the reasons you’ve listed; they both are..

I believe Murray and Nole look up to Roger and Nadal, perhaps for different reasons, but maybe Nadal is more relatable to them since he is of their age group and they can look at what he has achieved already, only a year older than them, with 10 slams. It almost seems like they’ve tried to adapt that model of improving and evolving as much as they can to reach their best. That evolution in Rafa is maybe what has been most striking to observe over the years I’ve seen him play. How he encounters a challenge, works to overcome it, and how he pretty much always does overcome it! That’s inspiring. Even the fact he plays left handed when he’s right handed – that’s so unique. Interesting guy.

Ditto Ajet. I am a huge Fed fan (if there is a GOAT, in my opinion he is it, absolutely and clearly – at least as of now). But it is beyond the pale to deny that Rafa is a great player.

As things stand, in the Open era there are clearly four in their own special group: Laver, Borg, Sampras, Federer. The ranking between them is debatable but not really between them and the rest. Except for one: Nadal is the only other player meriting consideration to join that illustrious group. In fact, I myself think he is already part of it. These top five are really a cut above the others, including true greats of the game like Connors, McEnroe, Agassi, Edberg, Becker. Even if you don’t agree that Rafa joins the big 4 yet (and I really do think that he is there), to deny he’s with Connors et al right below them is really, frankly, embarrassing.

well, that’s why he’s champion. that’s why fed’ds champion. nobody thought nadal can win wimby, but he did. nobody believed fed can win RG after what happened to him in 2008 there, but he proved those doubters wrong too. and nobody was giving fed any chance of beating nadal in madrid, but fed did it! proving doubters wrong is the hallmark of champions from every sports, including tennis. that’s understandable.
what’s funny is some think otherwise, and arew never satisfied. just like no matter what fed does, to some detractors he’s just plain lucky and stuff, same for nadal!

and I have enjoyed thoroughly djoker rising too, to break fedal dupoly in tennis! nobody cpuld have believed at one point that djoker can do it, but guess what, he did it! similarly everybody was scoffing at the idea of delpo having enough steel to beat fed in a slam final, nd delpo made all of them look like idiots! the way he could turn around the year’s story from being thrashed by fed to finally beating him, was amazing! similarly roddick may have lost the wim 09 to fed again, but i remember nobody believed roddick could make it so hard for fed and with due disrespect to him, were instead busy lamenting the absence of rafa; but proving others wrong and his fighting spirit, roddick really made fed earn his win in the toughest possible way instead of just lying down in the battle for fed to pick up victory! roddick gave us as memorable a wimby final as anyone ever did! it’s because roddick’s also a champion, though the situation seemed always pitted against him in the form of forcing him to play a guy in fed whose game was taylor-made to make roddick ineffective! but still roddick fought like a tiger and didn’t walk away from the challenge like a doggy. so looking at all these guys, we can know why they’re so special and why we should admire them!
this is why the guys are champions in true sense!

did i step on your toes again? shame on me for thinking differently from you. has anybody informed you that you are free to your choice?
if roger is your choice for “GOAT”, you made a great choice. as far as i’m concerned, it’s just not written in stone yet.

btw, you should be the last person on earth to refer to a fan as a “fanatic.” take a look at the “man in the mirror.”

Why the hell they have the HE when it can’t even determine the outcome of the rally EVERY SINGLE TIME a player asks for it? Are we really in 21st century or what? Delpo absolutely furious, and rightly so! Meanwhile, Fed, despite serving horribly, wins that marathon 1st game and breaks JMDP immediately to lead 2-0, then confirms the break easily to go 3-0…

Dave Says:
nadalista: we’re still waiting for you to stop attacking posters and to post something with a good argument. Otherwise, “get a life” would apply best to you :)

Who’s “we”?……you really are full of shi-ite. So which committee do you represent that I have to address myself to, oh chairman?? Take a leaf out of your alter-ego, @sienna and fade quietly into the background, will ya?……..even she realises that she was talking baloney about Rafa.

Thank goodness there are clear-headed Fed-fans even on this site who are savvy enough to see that acknowledging Rafa’s greatness does not diminish Roger’s…you, are not one of them!

And by the way, I have better things to do than present “arguments” to counter b#$lls%^t, that, is your vocation judging by your long boring posts!!!!

Dave Says:
nadalista: we’re still waiting for you to stop attacking posters and to post something with a good argument. Otherwise, “get a life” would apply best to you :)

In modern tennis history, only Federer, Laver, Lendl, Borg, Connors and Djokovic have had truly great seasons where they dominated their fields in such a one-sided way, despite all their top rivals playing well (Federer, Laver, Lendl, Borg did it for multiple seasons). Nadal had a great year in 2010 just like Wilander had a great year in 1988….

So true this. This is just what Nadal cannot achieve. He is a good player not a great player.

if one says djoker was in a slump on 2010 and that’s why nadal won 3 slams, then what about fed beating a virgin djoker for his 4th USO; kinda balances out, ain’t it! so what if nadal didn’t beat a legendary looking djoker for his USO; fed also didn’t beat a legendary djoker either for his 4th USO! and people may come up with fed won wimby 09 coz roddick was his best match-up(and who’s some mental block agaonst fed to falter at the last hurdle, no matter how hard he had fought; just like what happens to fed when he plays nadal in slams finals) or one might add just unluckily missed a volley in the 2nd set! and fed won 2009 FO coz he didn’t have nadal to deal with. and the list goes on(e.g. getting a shell-shocked murray in 2008 USO)! and it’s not like federer always beat and laver to win his slams either…
all the crap of demeaning fed’s wins in the aforesaid manner could come up if some fedmaniacs try to demean nadal’s 2010 in any way. so give up the lame excuses that nadal won slams in 2010 due to djoker’s tiredness and this and that and blah blah blah!

you can only beat whom you get in front to win slams, so no need to bother about fed/nadal beating some lesser guy than sampras or laver/ boris becker/ bjorn borg/ agassi or the like taking anything away from their magnificent years.

I completely agree with you that laver, borg, samras, federer and nadal are the 5 greatest players of tennis.

even though I’m a fan of purely aggressive tennis, and i root everythime against nadal except when he plays berdych, i still don’t find guys like connors, agassi, lendl, becker etc. comparabale to nadal. my vote for the top 5 guys in tennis is same as yours. to me also only laevr, borg, pete and fed are above nadal…

in tennis i consider greatness as sum of three factors:
TALENT+HARDWORK+ATTITUDE

and if points could be assigned to each of these factors, then fed, borg, laver, pete and nadal are above all else…

Lendl is above Nadal. Connors is above Nadal Come to think of it Mcenroe is above Nadal.

Nadal is in the third groupe just creeping in at #10 or something. He needs to beat Djoker in a slam other then gravel.. then he upos his status to one the greats in tennis. But not yet if the top 4 players. In order to become one of those he needs to get #1 and hold it for another year.

Fed is GOAT at the moment. Djokovic plays like last year for a year or 2 possible 3 then he could become GOAT or equal.

the achievements you list above clearly indicates Nadal is not among the top 5 players of all time. Heck they show he is not top 7 so after thjat it becomes a litl biased to place the players….
Thanks for reminding us.

nadal is already above everybody except the 4 that i have mentioned, so let’s get real and not unnecessarily waste time over it arguing.
time to move on folks, cheers or tears depending on whether you love or hate nadal! ;)

Yup. Very impressive, clean, hard ball striking by Fed today. And then the variety on top of that.

A bit ambivalent due to the crappy momentum-shifter at the start. First game was a real struggle – very similar to Rotterdam where, as Fed said after, if Delpo had broken to start it might’ve changed the whole color of the match. Here as well, but with a twist: at deuce Fed hit a first serve called an ace but Delpo was sure it was out (and Fed didn’t move, indicating he agreed). But the challenge system broke and, without a reply, the call had to stand. Delpo was just livid and it’s clear it continued to affect him for at least a couple games after, up to 0-3.

HA Ha Sienna, lol, actually must be new to tennis or otherwise totally ignorant about tennis history or the contemporay period.Nadal has got 10 grandslams,19 masters,4 Davis cups,Olympic gold,having better head to head against “the greatest ever”.Nadal`s success must have made Sienna totally delusional so as to utter absolute gibberish.Whate a joke.

Delpo let a questionable call get to him way too much. He needs to (a) grow up, and (b) show some fight, for god’s sake. What was that second set? He rolled over for Roger…again.

PS., one questionable service call – at DEUCE, on your opponent’s serve, when you’re only still in the game thanks to a lucky net cord on the preceding point? — sorry, but that shouldn’t send you spiraling into shoddy play for five minutes. Even if the call was wrong, and who knows, being “robbed” of facing a second serve at deuce isn’t the same thing as being robbed of a break point, let along of a break! The commentators were still talking about it in the second set when it was really just an irrelevant little blip.

Eric, although no doubt Fed was playing well, including serving 13 aces to Delpo’s none, I agree that Delpo didn’t seem to have much gumption in that second set, until the very last game, but it was too late.

It says Nadal and Nalby won’t be on before 3:00 so we have a wee hiatus.

This gives a litle more confidence about his sickness. He really did not wanted to waste any energy.

I think many of the Nadal fans and Ajet are new to tennis. They are probably very young fans and girlfans who where attrackted to the young warrior. ( he looked like a dream untill the hairlos started to arrive)but they do not have the full capacity and overview clearly that Dave has or myself as a matter to judge Nadal for the good player he is.

He never had a total dominant year. He never defended a nonclay title (which his odd! In defending titles you eliminate the element of luck involved and it shows you are a true dominator. Yet Nadal never could defend a nonclay title.)

Ajet,
I am not impressed with youre claims to being a Fedfan. You are a joke.
You are obviously only here as a poster to throw people of ,and with youre fake fandome (and fake ID?) you are trying to stir trouble.

But have a really good one you must be thrilled Fed got such an easy Victoire tonight

@Eric: Agree that JMDP shouldn’t be all that concerned when it was actually the very 1st game of the match, but on the other hand, it was a very long one. In other words, it’s not exactly pleasant if you fight 15 minutes for just one single game, have a couple of BPs & another 10 deuces & then lose it in the end…

Mem no problem with what you are saying. But don’t you think tournaments should have been balanced in terms of speed to get a 50 50 ratio for both Rafa and Roger. Rafas success is skewed by his clay court titles. Someone metioned that Roger beat Novak for his 4th US title. If Rafa is great why has he never showed up in the GS finals of 05 06 and 07 You could find him in Clay finals of cause. Fact of the matter is that Roger showed up in clay finals. His success on all surfaces, with clay being his less favourite, meant that rafa could get a positive head to head. Onle when roger start to decline was rafa able to really beat him in other GS finals. And stop the Nole keeping rogers record intact. What goes around comes around. If it wasnr for Rafa Roger would have had a 20 plus GS record. Then Nole showed up. That is the nature of competition. Some decline(Roger) and others get a serious beating(Rafa).

Ha Ha Sienna, If what Sienna is telling is true,then Nadal is the greatest asset for tennis in that he brings many young casual sport fans to tennis.Atleast Sienna admits it openely.Tennis always needs more fans to compete globally among sports.Having hair or not does not have anything to do with popularity,as Agassi`s fame proves.

good grief Juan Martin….what the hell was that? talk about not even making an effort. that ump in definietly in the hot seat this tournament…bad calls against fed raonic, bad calls here.

but, at the end of the day, if the challenge system is down, players have to respect the umps call and he called it good. can’t go changing the rules on the fly or bending the rules to suit one player…unless you’re rafa and take your sweet time between each point to serve.

;0

i wonder if the ump on rafa/fed match (if rafa makes it) will call him out on that….would be pretty funny of he did.

if fed can keep kicking nadal’s butt in the right moments, i wouldn’t mind him being human as nadal is the only threat to fed’s record. if fed can check rafa, then my worry ends w.r.t. anyone closing in on fed’s slam tally in this generation!
and that’d be so cool! :D

The basic qualities required to be an OBJECTIVE and FAIR Federer fan:
1. Hate Nadal.
2. You should “take out clay” in all your discussions (except of course Federer’s wins on clay).
3. Applaud the “objective” posters like Sienna, Dave, Skeezer, madmax, etc. when they throw cheap shots at Nadal.
4. Support and become a fan of big hitting players like Delpo, Raonic, etc who have either beaten Nadal a couple of times or show potential to beat him in future.
5. Support Djokovic in all the slam finals till be crosses 10 GS titles.
…..more to follow

paradox Says:
Ha Ha Sienna, If what Sienna is telling is true,then Nadal is the greatest asset for tennis in that he brings many young casual sport fans to tennis.Atleast Sienna admits it openely.Tennis always needs more fans to compete globally among sports.Having hair or not does not have anything to do with popularity,as Agassi`s fame proves.

Paradox of course tennis needs Nadal. Without Nadal Fed would have had how many slams? So him still being the Goat at this moment really shows the greatness of Federer.

English is compulsory in Holland, so everybody can read, wright and speak english so that comes to same.

My next door people are from Holland and when I asked them how come they speak such a good english they explained to me. Very good people, though football fans (Ajax) don’t care about tennis. Good drinkers too, though only beer no spirits;(

Last year I noticed that, though he was moving well laterally, he had problems when he had to go forward, to change direction. A poster made fun of me. We have seen once again that Roger uses that weakness perfectly.

I love watching Nalbandian; I will be sad when he decides to stop playing. He has a kind of “ease” about him when he plays. Ahh, would love for him to win this Masters – or better yet a slam – before he’s done. Wouldn’t even care if he beats Nole, cuase it would just be lovely to see for tennis fans.

Pff Nadal reacted on his return? And then took a look at the line for a double challenge. Well the litlle fokheas. How about that fo gamesmenship? I saw Roger playing a return or questionable ball. And he wnated to challenge but time already went by and the referre thought he could still challenge. Rog said No, to late.

Gamesmanship on the line of the wnant to be players council president. Eventhough the service of Nalbandian was out. That is orrelevant. If his bal landed right on the line he would have continued.

Nalby at his best still promises a great tennis, esp. when he is playing against the top 3. And this is one of those rare occasions Nalby is striking the ball really good. He won the 1st set. You can read in his eyes that he sees his chances today. Yet, we question, “Can he sustain his hunger and focus for another five games after missing two breakpoints in the 2nd game?”

Dave Says:
The brilliant Nalbandian laid two big beatings on Nadal in 2007, including a 6-0 bagel set in Paris and a whipping in Spain. Nalbandian’s last three losses to Nadal included four tight 6-7 or 5-7 sets even though Nalbandian wasn’t at his best or fittest. With a day to rest, let’s see what problems Nalbandian can pose for Nadal. It’s a big match that might just motivate Nalbandian to bring something special, though it’s a lot to ask. But Nalbandian has a better record against left handers than right handers.

Yeah, overall S Green, i was thinking Rafa was looking to win this thing. Could it be that all the doubles play too is catching up to him? Maybe not. We’ll see how this finishes up. Right now, tough to say, but this hold is crucial for Rafa.

Rafa has changed his game a little bit. It is difficult for him, because he doesn’t have a clear plan here.

So, I have the impression that he tries to deny angles to Nalby backhand, but unfortunately, Nalby is playing great with his forehand down the line, so you can’t pressurize the forehand neither. If Rafa wins this match, it will be only with his heart.

Nadal played great to avoid facing a BP at 0-30 the game before. Not so sure it wasn’t just Nalby choking at 5-5 though. Now we’ll see if Nadal can hang on for the set. Gut and brain both say ‘yes’ though, eh?

Nalbandian went for too much in the end. He overdone it. But let’s wait and see. He has a clear cut plan, was the better player for most of the match, so he has no reason to go down easy. And though he can be tight in money time, I saw him play great too in such moments.

@mat: plenty of people play great against Nadal for large stretches of time. The problem is that it’s nearly impossible to play that well for long enough to beat him.

To penetrate that impenetrable defense requires an amount of winners that very few human beings can generate without making a correspondingly large number of mistakes.

Eventually the opponent tires physically from trying to hit so hard and run so much, or mentally from trying to hit so close to the lines. Their game collapses in a rash of errors and Nadal prevails by attrition.

Djokovic has beaten Nadal because he can now run as long as Nadal can. Instead of having to go for winners from impossible positions, he can play long rallies until he has a clear shot. And he can do this for hours, until he finally breaks through Nadal’s defense.

Nalbandian has dropped serve and Nadal has held for 2-0. I said it would be a bagel and I see nothing yet to contradict my prediction.

Whatever happens, Nalby was playing sublime tennis for a set and a half. Happy to have seen that. If it stays at one break, he may have a chance to comeback, but I suspect Rafa has wrested control of this match and will win.

Imagine if ‘chicken-legs Nalby’ had 90% of the athletic speed and endurance of Federer or Djokovic. Nadal looked pedestrian for parts of the match because Nalby outsghone him. Nalby was 1 or 2 lucky shots from winning this in straight sets. Had Nalbandian kept up his level from the first 1.5 sets, Nadal would have had little chance. Win or lose, the high quality of Federer’s generation has proved themselves once again.

Thanks Sienna. Too many people were prematurely counting out Nalbandian, without considering that he is a big match player capable of rising to the occasion. Annacone was in the stands in Fed’s earlier matches. But apparently Annacone is sick with Fed’s flu today. My disappointment with Annacone, I’ll post later.

No prizes for guessing who “Roger Federer Fan” really is. Running to support Ajet everytime the youngling is in trouble. Boring.

@jane: Nadal’s lefty serve allows him to drag the opponent well wide of the court before he comes in. Nalbandian is never in a position to pressure Nadal with a passing shot. Nadal has plenty of time to hit a low-risk stop volley into tons of open court. He doesn’t need to be very precise.

He volleys pretty well when there’s no pressure–so do all the top players, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro. They rarely come in unless the opponent is completely out of position.

Hitting volley combos, volleying right on the lines, at tough angles, or deep behind the opponent: that’s a lost art from the days of Sampras and Edberg.

Only a few serve-and-volleyers practice it now, and Federer too, of necessity, because he needs to shorten the points.

steve-o thanks for your take. I don’t know but I have seen Rafa exhibit some great plays at net, maybe volleying in the classic way isn’t the right way to describe them. He just has good hands. But he plays so far back most of the time, he’d have to have his opponent way out of position. That is also why I don’t understand why players don’t come in more and finish points against him when he is behind the baseline. Mind you, he is darn fast too.

In fact as much as I dislike Rafa’s usual style of play (which is why I like Federer’s natural and beautiful style and Djoker’s reasonably effortless style), I think Nadal may the most accomplished volleyer today. His % of net points won or successful volleys must be quite high.

@mat4: Federer always has chances against Nadal. So did Nalbandian. But he butchered them, so he ended up losing.

Whether Federer wins depends entirely on what’s going on his head, whether he is comfortable with his game plan. It was quite close in AO, but he didn’t have the confidence to execute on the important points.

Will he have the confidence tomorrow? That uncertainty is what adds suspense and interest.

But what someone said on this board a few posts ago is correct – Djokovic knows he can outlast NAdal, so he can be patient and not rush into winners. Patience is very important in beating Nadal.

NAdal always makes the other player wait, even for the toss. Talk about arrogance and unsportingness! Then he runs around like a boxer in a ring. And then its all butt picking. Boy, I am surprised players shake that hand!!

steve-o Says:
“@jane: Nadal’s lefty serve allows him to drag the opponent well wide of the court before he comes in. Nalbandian is never in a position to pressure Nadal with a passing shot. Nadal has plenty of time to hit a low-risk stop volley into tons of open court. He doesn’t need to be very precise.

He volleys pretty well when there’s no pressure–so do all the top players, Djokovic, Murray, Del Potro. They rarely come in unless the opponent is completely out of position.”

This is what I like about my fellow Federer fans…..they track down every single positive comment about the cheater and refute them “objectively”.
Way to go mate….i like it

Hard to pick against Nadal in the Semi, from what I saw the ball is sitting up nice for him , giving him plenty of time to wind up and swing. This kinda surface he has a clear advantage, but will still cheer Fed, 9th Straight semi final at age 30, still relevant, still demanding respect from all he plays, deservedly so.

I think that, after a long time, Roger finally HAS a good plan against Rafa. But he didn’t stick to it in Australia and I believe that Roger, basically, can’t stick to a plan for a whole match. His last two semis in Australia demonstrated it clearly: against Djoko, he played the beginning of the second set with a clear conception in mind, against Rafa he went for Rafa’s BH a few games by set. But both times, he lacked the patience indispensable to win those matches and reverted to his aggressive, but ineffective game.

I remember just one match when No1e didn’t play well against Rafa, in the DC a few years ago. Then, Novak slowly improves with each match. So I don’t worry about the final, if he makes it: he will play reasonably well.

I also think that he should win against Isner, whose backhand is a liability, and when you make him run, he usually doesn’t serve that well.

He was obstinate and continued to hit the short return towards Nadal’s forehand throughout the match.
He made 63 Unforced errors against 34 of Nadal.
Nadal had one game plan and he executed it to perfection with constantly hitting his forehand to Federer’s backhand whereas Federer didn’t.
And not to mention the lack of confidence has against Rafa at crucial points. (Roger Federer- Responsible for his own Downfall? http://bit.ly/zpv4QI )

If Federer really wants to win this time, he will have to stick to his game plan and continue to exploit Rafa’s backhand just like Djokovic has done in the last 7 meetings. Otherwise it will be Deja Vu all over again for Federer.

@mat4
Too bad. Fed is not the only reason I watch or am a fan. Watched Rafa’s match and Isner. You’ll find Jane, Kimmi , Dari ( as an example ) have ther favs also but enjoy others games as well and is appreciative .Too each there own.

If Federer this, if Federer that, what a funny thing!
goodbye to Annacone and hire experts in this blog are the way to defeat the Spaniard. Urgent, Roger needs “method djokovic” to have a success match against Rafa.
First candidate, the supercomputer Dave

Thanks for the article on Nole’s coach mat4; I agree with the “taking a backseat” approach. He seems to really care for Nole and helping him realize his dreams; they have a simbiotic relationship that works so well.

don’t confused me with other sore losers. i don’t obsess over losses like you guys do. i understand that wins and losses are a part of the game. i post when i’m in the mood, not because nadal wins or loses.

you should try accepting reality as i do and you wouldn’t be so stressed out over things you can’t control!

I think it is going to be Deja Vu all over again. Nothing to take away from Fed, but that is the way their games and mind sets are set up right now.

If you play the right way, Nadal and Djoko are beatable. Nalbandian just proved that by playing sublime for 1.5 sets today. I am afraid if Fed will be able to do that. Fed is capable enough, but it happening today is less probable, esp here at the clay court in Indian wells. IF Fed plays like 2009 Madrid, he MAY win this one.

But Fed deserves all the credit to reach so far in the draw fighting illness and hot players. No one can take away that from him. Moreover, Fed at his best, is unbeatable, unlike Nadal and Djoko.

you’re right, i may or may not post tomorrow regardless of the outcome, but that’s my choice.

i just be myself. i’m not a pretense! i don’t need to post a congratulatory note on this blog everytime roger wins to convince you guys that i’m not bias toward him. i don’t congratulate nadal or any player every time he wins. in fact, i rarely come here to congratulate to any player. it’s not my thing! everybody here knows who i favor, but i love watching many players, including roger, but i don’t feel the need to announce it to the world.

contrary to what you might think, it has nothing to do with hating roger or any other player, because i don’t allow myself to be dragged down to a level of hating a player (whom i do not know) for beating nadal. tennis is not about that! i may criticize a player’s game or his attitude or anything to do with tennis, but i’m not into hatemongering. i enjoy tennis and i love a healthy debate, but attacking a player for personal reasons is not part of it. also, i don’t have the time to constantly post nor do i want to.

Nalbandian produced some swashbuckling Tennis today and what a match it was. Although Nadal was not at his best, he still found a way to win as his won’t (except against Novak ofcourse). I would say Nadal was lucky to scrape through as for the first two sets, Nalbandian was clearly the better player except for some minor blemishes towards the fag end of the second set which turned the match upside down. If only Nalbandian can produce this form with consistency he could be in the top five. But he rarely does and that is where the faultline lies. As far as Nadal is concerned, he played a okay match not upto his level, but still managed to win courtesy some silly mistakes from Nalbandian and that is a positive. It is now the tournament has reached its crescendo and we are in the semis where Nadal will meet Roger and what a blockbuster that would be. Although Roger does not have a good record against Nadal in outdoor Hardcourts, yet my gut feeling tells me that this time around he would make a match out of it especially considering that they are playing in day light where the court will be fast.

oh well, fedal again. GO FED!!!
I sure hope fed’s able to play two great sets tomorrow and not think of who he’s facing. That way, I think fed’ll have an equal chance at least, if not better, to win the match.

Yeah now I can guess that you said that because Indian Wells hosts a slow hard court. But I feel that the courts are faster than Miami and in the sun the ball travels even faster. The fact that Roger and Nadal are playing in the sun would give an advantage to the former in my humble opinion. Yes, you are right in saying that Roger has a mental block against Nadal and that prevents him from giving his best in a match that involves both. But I am hoping against hope that this time that things will be different and Roger will produce his magic on the courts. If Roger plays at his best level, nothing is impossible for Roger.

Last year, Nadal defeated a “strange” Federer in the Miami SFs at night. While I don’t expect that tomorrow’ match is not going to be a 6-3 6-2 affair, it may be something like 7-5, 7-5 or 6-4 7-6 affair given the way Federer is playing now. If Federer is more aggressive and as you say, able to come out in a better mindset, we might see a three setter with a 50:50 chance to both.

Dont be so pessimistic about Federer’s chances against the cheater.
Roger at his best would simply blow him out of the court.
He may lose this one only because of his illness or due to mono.
Federer is going to surprise us all by simply coming out all guns blazing against the cheater.
Even the gamesmanship and cheating wont be enough to beat Federer now.

To some of the very smart posters here who seems to think Nadal is not a great player, there is an average tennis player who may not have the same IQ as these posters had the following statement to make. Looks like Rafa is one of the great players of all time.

“He’s got a great work ethic, and obviously he’s one of the great players of all time,” Federer said of Rafa

thanks NK yeah i completely agree,im too much of a lady,but i have to say without mentioning names,theres a certain poster who i could quite happily slap this morning,if i were to come face to face with them lol,BTW im not a violent person either.

great posts yesterday from ajet,@3.10pm,3.19pm,3.22pm,i read some really idiotic posts yesterday,so it was refreshing to here someone using some common sense,regardless of rogers h2h against rafa,or rafas loosing record against nole,none have anything to be ashamed of,ones the best ever,and the other two are up there with the greats of the game,i dont know why some people have such a problem agreeing with that,facts are facts end of thanks again.

These courts are not quite what Roger needs at this point in his career in order to beat Rafa. IW is slow and, more importantly, high bouncing which makes it: 1. Harder to take Rafa’s time away and 2. Easier for Rafa to get the ball up on his BH.

In the past 2 years Roger has only won 1 tournament on slow outdoor hard courts (2010 Australian). Of the 11 tournaments he won since the beginning of 2010, 7 were on indoor hard and 3 were on relatively fast outdoor hard.

Also, Rafa always comes back very strong after these breaks he takes. It’s probably going to be Nole vs Rafa. Yawn. We can look forward to a 4 hour final. Yeah!

@5.06pm,sienna to skorocel it does not matter what you think or say hmm,eer evidently yes it does matter,quite alot in fact,ajet,nk,skeezer,skorocel,jane,mat 4,nims,michael,swiss maestro etc etc,and the great man roger federer himself,are all in agreement when they say,that rafa is one of the greatest players of all time,this forum is full of people that say that,you are in a very small minority who argue otherwise, err rant over.